Re: ACLU in Bed with Child molesters !

"sgdunn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Standing up for someone's rights is totally different from standing up
> for his actions. The ACLU doesn't confuse the two and shouldn't be
> scapegoated.
> "Chad Gore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > Liberal ACLU to Defend NAMBLA Child Molesters
> >
> > Associated Press
> > Aug. 31, 2000
> > Liberal ACLU to Defend NAMBLA Child Molesters
> >
> > BOSTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union will represent a liberal
> > group that advocates sex between men and boys in a lawsuit brought by
> > the family of a slain 10-year-old.
> >
> > The family of Jeffrey Curley of Cambridge said the North American
> > Man/Boy Love Association and its web site which is now off-line
> > incited the attempted molestation and murder of the boy on Oct. 1,
> > 1997.
> >
> > One of two men convicted in the killing, Charles Jaynes, 25,
> > reportedly viewed the group's web site shortly before the killing, and
> > also had in his possession some of NAMBLA's publications. Also
> > convicted in the killing was 24-year-old Salvatore Sicari.
> >
>     Advocating that a criminal act be made legal is perfectly legal. The
> family of a victim of a murder or wrongful death does not have standing to
> sue those who advocated commission of the crime or tort. If it were
> otherwise, free speech could not exist.
> > The ACLU said the case, filed in federal court in mid-May, involves
> > issues of freedom of speech and association.
> >
> > "For us, it is a fundamental First Amendment case," John Roberts,
> > executive director of the Massachusetts branch of the ACLU, told
> > Boston Globe Wednesday. "It has to do with communications on a web
> > site, and material that does not promote any kind of criminal behavior
> > whatsoever."
> >
> > ACLU officials said NAMBLA members deny encouraging coercion, rape or
> > violence.
> >
> > Attorney Lawrence Frisoli, who represents the Curleys, said he is glad
> > the ACLU is defending NAMBLA, because he has had trouble locating the
> > group's members.
> >
>     Fortunately, NAMBLA probably doesn't have that many members. Very few
> people would want it to be legal for pedophiles to act on their urges. (I
> know I wouldn't want it to be legal.) Of the few who do want sex between men
> and boys legal, most would be afraid to associate themselves with a group
> like NAMBLA for fear of being suspected of being pedophiles. Pedophiles and
> gays have another reason not to get involved with NAMBLA: They'd out
> themselves.


======

Don't waste any brain cells looking for logic from "Chad".  He's a
stark raving looney, aint'choo Chad??